Assessing children's competence to consent in research by a standardized tool: a validity study

被引:34
|
作者
Hein, Irma M. [1 ]
Troost, Pieter W. [1 ]
Lindeboom, Robert [2 ]
de Vries, Martine C. [3 ]
Zwaan, C. Michel [4 ]
Lindauer, Ramon J. L. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Amsterdam, Acad Med Ctr, Dept Child & Adolescent Psychiat, NL-1105 AZ Amsterdam, Netherlands
[2] Univ Amsterdam, Acad Med Ctr, Div Clin Methods & Publ Hlth, NL-1105 AZ Amsterdam, Netherlands
[3] Leiden Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Med Eth & Hlth Law, NL-2300 RC Leiden, Netherlands
[4] Erasmus MC, Dept Pediat Oncol & Hematol, NL-3015 GJ Rotterdam, Netherlands
来源
BMC PEDIATRICS | 2012年 / 12卷
关键词
Competence; Consent; Assessment; Tool; Drug trial; Informed consent; Decision making; Research; Child; Adolescent; DECISION-MAKING; CLINICAL-RESEARCH; MENTAL-CAPACITY; ADOLESCENTS; JUDGMENTS; ATTITUDES; CANCER;
D O I
10.1186/1471-2431-12-156
中图分类号
R72 [儿科学];
学科分类号
100202 ;
摘要
Background: Currently over 50% of drugs prescribed to children have not been evaluated properly for use in their age group. One key reason why children have been excluded from clinical trials is that they are not considered able to exercise meaningful autonomy over the decision to participate. Dutch law states that competence to consent can be presumed present at the age of 12 and above; however, in pediatric practice children's competence is not that clearly presented and the transition from assent to active consent is gradual. A gold standard for competence assessment in children does not exist. In this article we describe a study protocol on the development of a standardized tool for assessing competence to consent in research in children and adolescents. Methods/design: In this study we modified the MacCAT-CR, the best evaluated competence assessment tool for adults, for use in children and adolescents. We will administer the tool prospectively to a cohort of pediatric patients from 6 to 18 years during the selection stages of ongoing clinical trials. The outcomes of the MacCAT-CR interviews will be compared to a reference standard, established by the judgments of clinical investigators, and an expert panel consisting of child psychiatrists, child psychologists and medical ethicists. The reliability, criterion-related validity and reproducibility of the tool will be determined. As MacCAT-CR is a multi-item scale consisting of 13 items, power was justified at 130-190 subjects, providing a minimum of 10-15 observations per item. MacCAT-CR outcomes will be correlated with age, life experience, IQ, ethnicity, socio-economic status and competence judgment of the parent(s). It is anticipated that 160 participants will be recruited over 2 years to complete enrollment. Discussion: A validity study on an assessment tool of competence to consent is strongly needed in research practice, particularly in the child and adolescent population. In this study we will establish a reference standard of children's competence to consent, combined with validation of an assessment instrument. Results can facilitate responsible involvement of children in clinical trials by further development of guidelines, health-care policies and legal policies.
引用
下载
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Assessing children’s competence to consent in research by a standardized tool: a validity study
    Irma M Hein
    Pieter W Troost
    Robert Lindeboom
    Martine C de Vries
    C Michel Zwaan
    Ramón J L Lindauer
    BMC Pediatrics, 12
  • [2] Accuracy of the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Clinical Research (MacCAT-CR) for Measuring Children's Competence to Consent to Clinical Research
    Hein, Irma M.
    Troost, Pieter W.
    Lindeboom, Robert
    Benninga, Marc A.
    Zwaan, C. Michel
    van Goudoever, Johannes B.
    Lindauer, Ramon J. L.
    JAMA PEDIATRICS, 2014, 168 (12) : 1147 - 1153
  • [3] Key factors in children's competence to consent to clinical research
    Hein, Irma M.
    Troost, Pieter W.
    Lindeboom, Robert
    Benninga, Marc A.
    Zwaan, C. Michel
    van Goudoever, Johannes B.
    Lindauer, Ramon J. L.
    BMC MEDICAL ETHICS, 2015, 16
  • [4] Key factors in children’s competence to consent to clinical research
    Irma M. Hein
    Pieter W. Troost
    Robert Lindeboom
    Marc A. Benninga
    C. Michel Zwaan
    Johannes B. van Goudoever
    Ramón JL Lindauer
    BMC Medical Ethics, 16
  • [5] Feasibility of an Assessment Tool for Children's Competence to Consent to Predictive Genetic Testing: a Pilot Study
    Hein, Irma M.
    Troost, Pieter W.
    Lindeboom, Robert
    Christiaans, Imke
    Grisso, Thomas
    van Goudoever, Johannes B.
    Lindauer, Ramn J. L.
    JOURNAL OF GENETIC COUNSELING, 2015, 24 (06) : 971 - 977
  • [6] Assessing the competence of persons with Alzheimer's disease in providing informed consent for participation in research
    Kim, SYH
    Caine, ED
    Currier, GW
    Leibovici, A
    Ryan, JM
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY, 2001, 158 (05): : 712 - 717
  • [7] Children's competence to consent to medical treatment
    Alderson, Priscilla
    Sutcliffe, Katy
    Curtis, Katherine
    HASTINGS CENTER REPORT, 2006, 36 (06) : 25 - 34
  • [8] Spanish Validation of the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Clinical Research Interview for Assessing Patients' Mental Capacity to Consent to Clinical Research
    Baon-Perez, Beatriz S.
    Alvarez-Marrodan, Ignacio
    Navio-Acosta, Mercedes
    Verdura-Vizcaino, Ernesto J.
    Ventura-Faci, Tirso
    JOURNAL OF EMPIRICAL RESEARCH ON HUMAN RESEARCH ETHICS, 2017, 12 (05) : 343 - 351
  • [9] Terms of clinical research consent's validity
    Zivojinovic, Dragica
    Planojevic, Nina
    Banovic, Bozidar
    VOJNOSANITETSKI PREGLED, 2014, 71 (06) : 588 - 595
  • [10] Assessing capacity to consent to treatment with cholinesterase inhibitors in dementia using a specific and standardized version of the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool (MacCAT-T)
    Mueller, Tanja
    Haberstroh, Julia
    Knebel, Maren
    Oswald, Frank
    Kaspar, Roman
    Kemper, Christoph J.
    Halder-Sinn, Petra
    Schroeder, Johannes
    Pantel, Johannes
    INTERNATIONAL PSYCHOGERIATRICS, 2017, 29 (02) : 333 - 343